In the News

Controversial Developments Withstand Wildfires

The October 2007 wildfires that burned across 600 square
miles of Southern California and destroyed 1,500 homes have
provided the first real-world test of the controversial
"shelter in place" (SIP) program. Designed to permit residents
of planned developments that meet strict fire-safety standards
to remain in their homes as fires approach, SIP was developed
after wildfires in the area destroyed 2,400 homes and killed 18
civilians in 2003.

Homes in SIP communities — which tend to be very
high-end — incorporate numerous fire-resistant
features, including noncombustible roofing and siding; boxed
eaves with screened vents (to resist windblown embers);
interior sprinkler systems; tempered-glass windows; and a
100-foot "defensible space" around the exterior, within which
ungaraged vehicles, certain types of vegetation, and other
easily ignited materials are prohibited. The communities as a
whole are required to provide an adequate water supply for
firefighters; roads and driveways wide enough to accommodate
two-way traffic and firefighting equipment; and a perimeter
"buffer zone" of fire-resistant vegetation.

Some health and safety advocates strongly object to the SIP
concept, arguing that it's dangerous and irresponsible to leave
residents — including those with respiratory problems
— cut off from help and exposed to smoke, ash, and
fumes. And antisprawl activists say the SIP program encourages
developers to build in remote areas.

Such arguments are likely to persist. Nevertheless, the fact
that all five of the SIP developments built in San Diego
County's Rancho Santa Fe Fire Prevention District survived the
fires suggests that highly fire-resistant developments are at
least plausible.

According to fire-prevention district spokesperson Julie
Taber, no homes in either of the two SIP communities directly
hit by the 200,000-acre Witch Creek fire were destroyed, and
only one home suffered significant damage. The fire itself was
"pretty severe," she says. "At Cielo, especially, they had
quite a bit of fire up and through and around the
houses."

The one case of damage involved a garage door that ignited
because combustible material had been piled against it;
fortunately, the flames were extinguished when the sprinkler
head just inside the door activated. — Jon
Vara

Offcuts

• A recent Finnish study of worker lifting
techniques, which is summarized on the "Occupational Hazards"
Web site, concludes that employer efforts to teach proper
lifting techniques are completely ineffective at reducing
work-related back injuries, as is the use of protective devices
like back belts. Study author Kari-Pekka Martimo speculates
that the failure of all the teaching methods examined may mean
that improved lifting techniques simply don't exist.

• "Renovation parties" — allegedly a trend
among homeowners looking to save money on remodeling projects
— have resulted in myriad problems caused by alcohol
and ineptitude, reports the Wall Street Journal. The paper
cites such examples as hanging drywall backward, removing the
wrong walls, and using a Sawzall to cut through
wiring‚ and quotes NARI secretary Dean Herriges as
saying, "These parties are invitations for disaster."

• The National Association of Realtors estimates that
existing home sales for 2007 will be 10.8 percent lower than
2006 sales. That prediction, released in October, marks the
association's eighth straight downward revision of the figure.
Its first estimate for 2007, released in February, predicted a
sales decline of only 0.6 percent.

• Are builders becoming political punching bags?
According to the Washington Post, a couple of Prince William
County, Va., politicians engaged in some builder-bashing during
a news conference held in October outside the local office of
the Northern Virginia Building Industry Association. "What
really disgusts me," said county board of supervisors chairman
Corey A. Stewart, speaking of the alleged hiring of illegal
immigrants by residential builders, "is they're not the ones
paying the price. We pay the price." The next day, association
vice president Jim Williams responded that "the grandstanding
the chairman is doing is probably the lowest point I have seen
in election politics in over 30 years."

• So-called "anti-monotony ordinances" have become a
popular tool of town planners in upscale Chicago suburbs,
reports the Chicago Tribune. An ordinance enacted in April in
the city of Woodstock, for instance, prohibits the town from
issuing building permits for houses that the local building
inspector finds to be similar in appearance to any dwelling on
the same street or within 300 feet. "We don't want people to
drive down the streets and see the same facade over and over
again," explains city planning and zoning administrator Jim
Kastner.

• Real estate foreclosures are increasing the threat
of West Nile virus, say health officials in Contra Costa
County, Calif. Mosquitoes are breeding rapidly in the swimming
pools and spas of many of the county's 10,000 foreclosed
properties, nearly half of which are in areas at highest risk
for the mosquito-borne illness. There were eight cases of West
Nile virus in Contra Costa county in 2006, including two
fatalities.

Legislation Puts
Heavy Burden on Florida Roofers

A recently enacted Florida law has brought residential
reroofing in much of the state to a virtual standstill. HB
7057, which took effect on October 1, requires roofing
contractors replacing a roof on any single-family residential
structure built before March 2002 to upgrade the deck nailing
schedule and add a peel-and-stick secondary moisture barrier.
In addition, if the home is valued at more than $300,000 and is
located in Florida's coastal windborne-debris zone,
roof-to-wall connections must be beefed up with added
structural clips or straps and, at gable-end walls, with extra
bracing.

One problem with the new law is that enhancing roof-to-wall
connections is generally considered structural work, which
under Florida law must be performed by a licensed general
contractor. Steve Munnell, a spokesman for the Florida Roofing,
Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors Association, says
that at least a million Florida homes now require an additional
permit, a GC as well as a roofer, and a minimum of two extra
inspections for a simple reroofing job. As a result, he says,
countless stripped roof decks will be unnecessarily exposed to
weather for days or weeks.

An even bigger problem, according to Munnell and other
critics, is that there's no evidence the law will make
structures any stronger. They attribute this to a provision
— apparently intended to protect consumers from price
gouging — that caps the cost of the required changes
at 15 percent of the total price of the reroofing job. "For
that money, the GC probably can't do much more than tear off
some roof sheathing and add some ties at the corners," Munnell
says.

The final irony, says Munnell, is that existing roof-to-wall
connections, even on older houses, seem to hold up perfectly
well in the face of high winds. "I saw a lot of blown-off
shingles and tile after Hurricane Charlie [in 2004]," he says,
"but you didn't have structural failures unless the roof deck
was penetrated by a falling tree or some kind of
missile."

Industry trade groups and state agencies — including
the Florida Building Commission, which administers the Florida
Building Code — tried to persuade legislators to
postpone the law's enactment for a year, in hopes that its
worst flaws could be fixed in the interim. Now that they've
failed, the mood among many roofers is gloomy. "We're getting
calls from homeowners who want to know if they should hold off
on a new roof until things are straightened out," Munnell says.
"A lot of those jobs are probably going to be done by
homeowners or unlicensed guys working without a permit."
— Jon Vara

Building Department
Probe Yields Multiple Arrests

Builders and taxpayers in the western Long Island town of
North Hempstead had reason to cheer this fall when
investigators with the Nassau County district attorney's office
arrested four former and present employees of the town building
department as part of a 16-month probe into what District
Attorney Kathleen Rice called "a systemic ring of greed and
corruption."

All four of those arrested on October 15 face possible prison
terms of up to seven years. The most prominent suspect, former
building commissioner David Wasserman, faces a 29-count
indictment alleging that he ran an illegal architectural
practice, forged and altered town records, and received illegal
gratuities for approving construction of a local gym. Former
deputy commissioner Joseph Madden was charged with accepting
cash bribes in exchange for inspection certifications and
approval of building plans. Joseph Acierno, a former department
plans examiner, was charged with illegally drafting
architectural plans, filing false financial disclosure
documents, and underreporting his personal income to New York
state.

And current building inspector Thomas McDonough was charged
with four counts of bribery and grand larceny by extortion,
allegedly for refusing to inspect a drywell unless the
homeowner purchased $900 worth of tickets for a political
fund-raiser.

The October 15 arrests followed the August arrest of another
former North Hempstead official, plumbing inspector Joseph
Lomanaco, who was charged with lying on the town's financial
disclosure form and filing a permit application on his own home
years after completing the work.

A spokesman from the district attorney's office refused to
comment on the likelihood of additional arrests.

The question now — given Nassau County's longstanding
reputation for corruption among political appointees —
is whether the arrests will prompt other building officials to
clean up their acts.

Area remodeler Mike Sloggatt, who does business throughout
Nassau County, says that while he hopes the arrests have a good
effect, questionable practices remain widespread and deeply
entrenched.

"I don't play that game," he says, "but some of my customers
have." He tells of an incident from his own experience in which
a homeowner, informed that it would take several months to get
a building permit, said, "Give me the plans, I'll take care of
it." The following day, the customer was back with the approved
plans in hand.

"Later on," Sloggatt says, "I got a call from the guy. He
said, ‘You don't want to go to the Republican Ball, do
you?' The tickets had cost him a few hundred bucks, but he
thought it was worth it." — Jon Vara